Topic: What kinds of game play do you want from Wii U?

[Caterkiller]

Years ago after the Wii was revealed we had a thread discussing what types of game concepts we wanted to see. I don't really remember but chances are the majority of our dreams were dashed to pieces.


Now we have this new screen in hand and it should offer much more as far as accuracy and well just plain old being able to work. What types of concepts can you imagine with this thing, what future game play elements do you want to see?


With the Wiimote it was very easy to come up with concepts, the problem is it wasn't accurate. So many of our old dream games were unfeasible. Though I can't see the possibilities with this pad as clearly as the wiimote, i'm certain this will deliver in a much more satisfying way.

[nickmitch]

How about a Pokemon game where the uPad is a Pokedex? You could look up Pokemon, review types/effectiveness and move-sets. Maybe even make a Pokemon game where you control the Pokemon in a more action-y style.

[Caterkiller]

I'd like star fox to evolve somewhat with the tablet controller. I'd like a map on the on rails sections showing different pieces of the environment that could be manipulated by certain members. Remember Sector Z and Sector X? Peppy would help open the warp portals in sector X and they all would help take down the missiles? But instead of completely scripted events for the wing men i'd love just to be able to point to an object on the map and have Falco fly after it. Especially if I am preoccupied with taking care of something else.


Same with bosses in an all range mode. Of course everyone would have an enemy on their tail from time to time, but when they are free it would be cool to assign then to destroy cannons, arms, legs, etc while keeping the fast frantic game play.

[NWR_insanolord]

I am in favor of anything that gets us the new, internally-developed Star Fox game I demanded in the SF643D Club Nintendo survey.

[Chozo Ghost]

I would like to see a console version of Advance Wars which could use multiple Tablet controllers for local multiplayer and then you could command your armies on the tablet screen without the other players seeing what you are doing.

[Mop it up]

I just want to see Nintendo create the best possible games they can make, and find ways for the Wii U features to enhance their game ideas instead of deliberately designing a game around the controller. Don't justify the hardware by forcing the use of features in games where they don't belong, design the hardware around the software in the works.

[Ian Sane]

I agree with Mop.  On the Wii (and to a lesser extent on the DS) Nintendo's approach to game design changed significantly and I would say for the worse.  They became pre-occupied with the gimmick and how to make games to "prove" the worth of the gimmick.  It's just ass-backwards design and making a great game with that formula is going to be largely a fluke.  Great games don't force things, they flow and evolve naturally.

The problem with the touchscreen and the Wii remote is that Nintendo didn't design some great game and then realize that they needed to make a new control method to achieve it.  You can see that sort of design with the N64 where in the development of Super Mario 64 it became clear that they needed something other than a d-pad so the analog stick was added.  It isn't a fluke that the analog stick became a standard overnight.  It was a natural evolution that occured because of Nintendo setting out to design a great game and realizing they needed to expand on the then traditional controller to achieve it.

This is not so with the DS and Wii.  They thought "hey we should add a touchscreen" and then spent years trying to figure out how to really use the thing.  Same with motion control.  They came up with the control scheme first and then tried to come up with games that used it.  But they couldn't come up with much so they shoehorned it in and forced things.  20 years from now when the initial fever of those systems' popularity has long passed I think games with forced touchscreen or motion control will come across as very dated and will not be fondly remembered.  Something like DKC Returns will be remembered as a potentially great game ruined by the need to force it to use gimmick controls and will probably be re-released without them.

The problem is the Wii U is continuing down the same path with this tablet thing.  This idea is really no different from the DS, only it's now in a console.  The dual screen/touchscreen design was never inspired by game design.  It was forced and thus this is as well.  So if Nintendo goes out with the idea of "prove" the concept of the tablet, the idea is already toast.  We'll get half-baked gimmicky junk.  My ultimate hope is that the lukewarm reception of the 3DS will inspire Nintendo to change course and become more conventional.

What I really want is just a normal system with a normal controller and any new controller ideas come about naturally as a result of game design requiring them.  I want Nintendo to focus on making great games.  Not games for this audience or that audience or games that use this accessory or that accessory - just great games PERIOD.

[broodwars]

From my experience, the best games on the DS either barely used the touchscreen or didn't use it at all.  They were just great games that happened to be on a system with two screens (one being a touch screen).  My view would be the same on Wii U: if they can make games that take advantage of the technology and deliver something new, great.  But otherwise, just make great games and let the game develop naturally, without having to shoehorn in touchscreen/dual-screen functionality where it doesn't make things better.

[Chozo Ghost]

The problem with the touchscreen and the Wii remote is that Nintendo didn't design some great game and then realize that they needed to make a new control method to achieve it.

Wii Sports wouldn't have been possible without motion controls. Not only was Wii Sports a game which proved the concept of motion controls, but it was bundled with the system by default since day one. And it is a highly popular game.

But the problem is Wii Sports is a casual game and motion gaming's potential for hardcore games was never really realized on the Wii. Its a sad thing that games on the PS3 like Resistance 3, Killzone 3, SOCOM 4, and so on are proving the concept. Nintendo had many years headstart with motion gaming, but aside from casual crapware that was pretty much all that it was used for on the Wii. But it is being proven and successfully utilized on the PS3 though.

Everyone of those PS3 games I mentioned were shooters, and I think all of them are 1st party Sony titles. The problem is Nintendo doesn't do shooters at all, so the only shooters the Wii had were a few mediocre 3rd party offerings like Red Steel and Conduit and so on which weren't spectacular enough to prove the concept. But Sony is pulling it off. I think that's being proven as we speak. Its just too bad Nintendo won't make those kinds of games themselves.

[Ian Sane]

The problem with the touchscreen and the Wii remote is that Nintendo didn't design some great game and then realize that they needed to make a new control method to achieve it.

Wii Sports wouldn't have been possible without motion controls. Not only was Wii Sports a game which proved the concept of motion controls, but it was bundled with the system by default since day one. And it is a highly popular game.

Wii Sports undoubtably could not have been done any other way.  But did they come up with Wii Sports and then created the controller in response to that or was Wii Sports the best they could come up with for this control gimmick they came up with?  Considering that Wii Sports is pretty much a glorified tech demo which doesn't even let you move your character in tennis or do any fielding in baseball, I doubt Nintendo came up with the game first.  If they did it's a rather questionable decision to design their whole controller around such a restrictive game.  If anything Wii Sports' limitations would be a clue to the limitations of motion control itself.  It seems more likely Nintendo decided they didn't want to go with expensive hardware and needed some feature to distinguish the new system from the Gamecube as well as a gimmick to attract casuals.  Wii Sports, with it's limitations and dumbed down gameplay, was the BEST they could come up with because the whole thing was forced from day one.  They came up with the concept, figured it would let them do all sorts of new creative things, and then found out the hard way that that assumption was wrong.

The sad part is the DS already proved the flaw with the idea.  They struggled hard to come up with good ideas for the touchscreen and failed and in the end third parties pretty much ignored the feature entirely.  The first year of the DS was sad with all sorts of lame touchscreen ideas flopping hard.  That should have told Nintendo that coming up with an "innovative" controller and then hoping it inspires all these great ideas doesn't work.  But the DS was also very successful despite that so Nintendo either learned the wrong lesson or they knew full well that this model doesn't work in regards to making better games but DOES work in attracting interest from casuals who never give you a second thought overwise.

If the Wii U is successful as anything beyond a casual/kiddy system (and it won't be successful as just that, for the casual market has switched to smart phones) it will be despite the tablet.

[KDR_11k]

Many things. What I don't want is games that are designed around using the controller instead of a TV and thus avoid doing anything novel with the touchscreen.

[nickmitch]

That was one the "big" features that didn't make sense to me. If I wanna play chess on a tablet, I'll buy a damn iPad/Galaxy Tab/Whateverthefuck.

[Stogi]

"The problem with the touchscreen and the Wii remote is that Nintendo didn't design some great game and then realize that they needed to make a new control method to achieve it. You can see that sort of design with the N64 where in the development of Super Mario 64 it became clear that they needed something other than a d-pad so the analog stick was added."

IanSane, if the world worked like you hoped, it would be ass-backwards.

The most profitable companies in the world do one of two things: provide a product or provide a platform. Google provides a platform. BP provides a product. Facebook provides a platform. Subway provides a product. Nintendo is in a unique situation where they provide both.

If necessity is the mother of all invention, then innovation is the conglomeration of inventions. Furthermore, creativity is how to wisely use those innovations.

Nintendo didn't think of Super Mario 64 then think about the technology they would need to play that game. In the business world, that never works. You are likely to end up with exorbitant R&D costs and a very narrow platform. Instead, Nintendo thought about the platform of how all 3D games would be played and what is necessary to make them work. Analogue sticks were already invented, so through innovation, they made the 64 controller and console what it was, i.e. a giant platform where both Mario and GoldenEye (a game that had to be unforeseen, but was creatively made) shined.

Those same principles are true today. Don't go into development thinking about a specific idea. Instead, think about widening your platform; adding utilities that broaden it, and stripping away those that lessen it.

Faced with a challenge of whether to let graphics be the main broadening tool for the platform after the gamecube, Nintendo decided they they did not want to fight for the same platform space with other companies. So instead they focused on a new controller. They scoured the world for technologies that could pertain to their market. There wasn't a specific game in mind, because there never is. Instead, they were looking for the chance to be innovative. And guess what? They found it. The Wii Remote, love it or hate it, changed the scope of every major videogame companies platform forever. All the sudden it wasn't about graphics anymore and being content with control design, it was about widening the platform on all fronts.

Nintendo deserves a lot of credit for that. Their game designers deserve a lot of credit for making the most of that platform from day one with Wii Sports. It was an obvious game, but it was done in a perfect style that drew in a number of new customers.

So now Nintendo is looking for another innovation to help broaden their platform and thus, their appeal. And I think they found it again. Streaming technologies, the ability to take your game away from your living room, broadens the platform of both game development and appeal. When used in tandem, it has even more power.

Did they have a specific game in mind before looking into streaming tech? Nope. Did they recognize the tech's innovative potential? Yes. Do they have an elite game development community who becomes ecstatic at the chance of being creative? Yes. Will they take these innovations and make them into a solid product for which people can use them creatively? That is the point; and not the other way around.

[bustin98]

The idea I pitched in the Wii thread turned out to be very similar to how From Dust plays. There are differences, but some concepts are there.

I just want to see some smart usage of the touchscreen, and no holding back on the features of the system.

[ThePerm]

Someone Mentioned Pokémon

Hmm, if made properly a Pokémon could have three things

a built in hey you Pikachu, the Wii u has a microphone in the controller after all. This time you could raise up all the Pokémon like this in a very Nintendogs sort of way.

Voice command attacks, "Pikachu do lighting!, dodge, duck!" They could make the fights more active then totally turn based with this system.

the touch screen menus can aid you in giving potions to your monster during battle, you could throw poké balls with a stylus swipe.

online, everyone's been begging for this for years, and I'm pretty sure this would move systems. This seems to be the first console that could pull it off out of Nintendo too. I just hope Nintendo doesn't continue to treat this franchise as mainly for handhelds. It would be even better if they unveil a game they've been working on for 15 years...lol.

and i don't care about previous games style, lets take advantage of the power of the system. I don't want Mature, i just want realistic, and Realistic could mean fucking cute as ****...irresistibly cute. Fur Shading!

[Adrock]

Wii Sports is intentionally simplified. You don't move your Mii's body because you're not supposed to. Jesus. It's been like 5 years. Why does this need to be said again?

The benefit of the DS was that, for many games, the menu screen was relegated to one of the screens, usually the bottom one. Not every idea has to revolutionize the entire industry. It can exist if it makes games better. It won't make every game better but it doesn't have to.

I see the benefit of the tablet controller especially in a game like Zelda. I can't imagine going back to the original Ocarina of time after playing the 3DS version. The touchscreen changed the entire experience. Having the additional screen kept me in the game by reducing pausing exponentially. That may seem minor, but it's really not. It added another level of immersion which is so important in interactive media.

We'll probably never mention a second touch enabled screen in the same breath as the d-pad, shoulder buttons, or analog stick as functions that revolutionized gaming, but just like those things, the 2nd screen, when used effectively, made games better. Certainly, there will be many developers who shoehorn functions and they likely would have made a shitty game either way. That doesn't make the features not worthwhile.

[Morari]

Wii Sports is intentionally simplified. You don't move your Mii's body because you're not supposed to.

But you do need to. Tennis was virtually unplayable because you would always lose simply due to the AI not moving about the court quick enough, or moving in anticipation for the opponent's next shot.

[Kytim89]

What I am hoping with the Wii U is that Nintendo will try to dable in hardcore gaming as much as they sisi with casual gaming with the Wii. Third parties must also devliver the same scale of games on the Wii U as they did for the other HD systems, but at the same time work closely with Nintendo to make the best iterations of their games available on the market. Overall, the games made for the Wii U must push the system to its limits from the begining. Every game must bring something new to table, both for first and third party software. Nintendo's IPs, both new and old, must expand into boundaries not seen in Nintendo's history.

[nickmitch]

I think I'm gonna flesh out my idea for a Pokemon game a little more since I already started. I was thinking it'd be an action game where you actually control the Pokemon in a 3D space. Now, normally this would be impossible with around 500 Pokemon in existence. BUT, we can restrict this the old fashioned way: with story! What story? Well, I would base it on the manga, Pokemon Adventures (great read, BTW). By sticking to Red, Blue & Green you basically limit the roster to a relatively small sample of the original 151. Any way, you'd use the uPad as a Pokedex, giving you info about the opponent and your Pokemon's moveset, effectiveness, etc. Adding Yellow would be a cool DLC. I think the most interesting gameplay mechanic would be Red's eevee. See, Red found and rescued this eevee that Team Rocket was experimenting on. Long story short, it can evolve and devolve back and forth.

[Chozo Ghost]

The details can be settled later, but I for one would be content knowing there were just games in general coming to the Wii U instead of years of droughts. That said, it would also be nice to see more new original I.P.s and less remakes and sequels.

[TJ Spyke]

Wii Sports is intentionally simplified. You don't move your Mii's body because you're not supposed to.

But you do need to. Tennis was virtually unplayable because you would always lose simply due to the AI not moving about the court quick enough, or moving in anticipation for the opponent's next shot.

I rarely ever lost in the tennis game because it was too easy.

[nickmitch]

I got to a point where I couldn't win, but I think it was pretty far. Tennis was far from unplayable.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I hit stale mates so often against the computer, that they ended up having to cheat just to not lose. I was almost unbeatable in tennis for a while.

[Ceric]

An RPG with QTE style attacks (Think Mario Series RPGs).

Do Summon: Gameplay pauses short EBA game.  Summoned something awesome with the power of Cheering.

[Stogi]

I want unbalanced co-op or competitive local playing games. Tablet vs. Wiimote. Or Tablet + Wiimote vs. others.

Like a FPS where someone controls one soldier while someone else controls the rest of the troops. Or someone is on the ground while someone is above providing air support.

Or like that UBISOFT game where it's an RTS vs. a FPS. One person sends waves of aliens/zombies/bad dudes while the other tries to fend them off.


Or in a game like Zelda, someone can be Link with most if not all the weapons, and another can be a quick explorer, exploring places Link can't reach. He/she could climb walls and ceilings or something. Maybe they could see through walls if they point the tablet at the screen where Link is facing. There could be areas where Link would have to pave the way using bomb arrows, carefully destroying barriers as to not hit his fragile friend, while the other player is being chased for having stole something by an indestructible titan.